Very Superstitious

Superstition: (noun) An irrational belief that an object, action, or circumstance not logically related to a course of events influences its outcome.[1]

These days my life seems to revolve around song cues. Tunes pop into my head, infecting me with earworms until I figure out why that song stays on repeat. Today it's the old Stevie Wonder song “Superstition.”

I think the cause is all the talk I'm seeing about reviews on the Toot-place. Writers turning themselves inside out to get more reviews so they can get more sales. It's all very superstitious and a waste of time.

Reviews do not drive sales. Sales drive reviews.

Logic suggests, if you want more reviews, then sell more books.

A lot of writers fight me on this. If reviews drove sales then my books with the most reviews would be getting the most sales. That's patently false. My oldest books are the ones with the most reviews, because they have the most cumulative sales.[2]

It's not just my books. It's everybody's books. The longer they're out in the marketplace, the more they sell. The more they sell, the larger the population of reviewers becomes so the reviews accumulate.

The dynamic I see repeated time and again?

A new author releases their first book and panics, believing the myth that they need fifty reviews before magical, good things happen. They scramble around, talk up the book. As the word spreads, more sales accrue which results in more reviews. The author sees more reviews and thinks that the reviews caused the new sales.

In statistics we call that correlation without causation. The two statistics are correlated, but the cause of the one – sales – is not the other – reviews. That link goes the opposite way.

Maybe it's clearer if you consider that it's impossible to review a book you haven't read without lying.

How do readers get books?

They buy them or get them from the library. Advance reader copies consist of pre-publication giveaways. They represent no-cost sales. The author trades their current time and focus – along with future revenue – for those potential reviews under the belief that a future potential reader, seeing the review, will treat that title more generously.

That dynamic underscores the point.

If the author hadn't sold the book (at a zero price) to the advance reader, they wouldn't be able to get a review.

Why do writers spend so much time and effort to get reviews in the first place?

One valid reason: They need some number of reviews before they can submit a book to one of the promotional sites.

Whether that will make a difference in the long run remains an unknown. Promotional sites can be boom or bust. Roll the dice and see what happens. At least that's a reason based on logic.

I don't buy the social proof argument.

Most readers find reviews on Amazon or its step-child Goodreads. The potential reader is already looking at the book's cover. They're seeing the product description and the cumulative star rating. The author has already done the heavy lifting by getting their book in front of a potential reader.

The argument for social proof holds that readers look at the reviews to decide whether or not the book is worth the time and money after they've already decided to look at the book.

My counter argument is that they only look to confirm the decision they've already made.

They've already made the effort to look up the book. They've seen the cover and description. Most people will reject it within a few seconds unless they see something they like.

At that point the potential reader – having already invested effort to find the book, look at the cover, and read the first few lines of the description – must decide whether or not to take the plunge.

The social proof argument holds that the potential reader will scroll down the page to find the reviews in order to make up their mind.

I see three situations.

The reader doesn't like something. Maybe the cover. Maybe the description. Maybe the price. They're disposed to reject it but they need a reason, so they look at the reviews to confirm that decision. “Oh, look! See? too much swearing! I hate that.” Without reviews, this reader would have already passed.

The reader likes something, but not all of it. Again, cover, description, price are okay but maybe the star rankings aren't high enough. They disposed to sample/buy but they need a reason. They look at the reviews to confirm their decision. “Oh, look! See? Too much swearing! Sounds great!” Without reviews, this reader would have already bought.

The reader is a true edge case. They really like the cover, but the description leaves them flat, or vice versa. Could there be something in the reviews that helps? Without reviews, this reader would probably flip a metaphorical coin. I'm not convinced that this is the most common situation.

I acknowledge that some readers just like to spend time reading about reading and religiously check the reviews to see what other people wrote about the writing. Those aren't the heavy readers I'm looking for.

My personal stance: Just sample the book and see for yourself.

It doesn't usually take much time to read enough of the sample to decide to toss it. You can take the “Look Inside” option right on the Amazon page to see the opening paragraphs. I also know how easily the review process can be gamed. I don't trust it, especially for an author I never heard of before.

For me, chasing reviews isn't worth the time or effort. That's effort better spent writing the next book.

Believing that reviews make a significant positive difference in sales?

Very superstitious.

Up Next:A Bucket of Pennies

Def. retrieved from Wordnik and credited to The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition.
Well, except for that one book that pissed the fans off. That got a lot of reviews quickly but that's a different story.